大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 68.22

68.22

Regarding the commentary's statement, "It may also be aligned with the minds of the ten samādhis above," Master Huiyuan says: "These nine specific phrases are the samādhis of the ten emptinesses. Because the emptiness of phenomena and the emptiness of the ultimate truth are combined, the nine subsume the ten. Among the nine there are also four: the first four explain indestructibility in terms of the preceding contemplation; the next one explains indestructibility in terms of the preceding diligence; the next one explains indestructibility in terms of the preceding attainment of superiority; the final three explain indestructibility in terms of the preceding causal circumstances." Now, as for the first, the commentary says: "First, faith in principle is decisive." The treatise says: "First, the indestructible faith in contemplation," which explains indestructibility in terms of previously entering the samādhi of emptiness, because the treatise sūtra previously stated "due to faith in the samādhi of emptiness." Second, the commentary says: "Practice is capable of being supple." This corresponds to the treatise's "indestructible adaptability." This explains indestructibility in terms of the preceding samādhis of the emptiness of phenomena and the emptiness of the ultimate truth: grasping at existence in the mind ceases, and one is able to enter the emptiness of phenomena and the emptiness of the ultimate truth. Thus the treatise says, "adaptable to emptiness without attachment"; and the sūtra says, "purely good and without attachment to emptiness," which is the emptiness of the ultimate truth. The commentary adds the word "practice," which refers to the preceding practice of contemplating the two emptinesses. Third corresponds to what the treatise calls "indestructibility without shock or fear in the secret place," explaining indestructibility in terms of the preceding great emptiness. The ālāyavijñāna is subtle, secret, and difficult to fathom, hence it is called the secret place. The sūtra says "profound"; being able to enter the secret, it is termed without fear. Fourth corresponds to the treatise's "indestructibility through non-movement in one's own vehicle," explaining indestructibility in terms of the preceding harmonious emptiness. Practice accords with the tathāgatagarbha, hence one does not regress in one's own vehicle. Fifth corresponds to the treatise's "indestructibility through arousing vigour," explaining indestructibility in terms of the preceding samādhi of the emptiness of the ultimate truth through diligence. Being able to arouse practice and cultivation, it is called vigour; hence the commentary says, "supreme progress without cessation." Sixth corresponds to the treatise's "indestructibility through abandoning the defilements of stinginess, jealousy, and broken precepts," explaining indestructibility in terms of the preceding samādhi of emptiness aroused by attaining superiority. The former concerned the virtue of practice, whereas this concerns the virtue of severing. The former was regarding benefiting others, whereas this is regarding self-benefit. However, the treatise sūtra says "due to a pure mind," explaining it in terms of severing. The present sūtra says "a vast mind"; vast is the mind of compassion, and great is the mind of cognition. These are the minds of the two benefits, and the two minds guide each other. The three kinds of indestructibility from "annihilating self and other" downward explain indestructibility in terms of the three preceding causal circumstances, except that the seventh and eighth reverse order: because the sixth generally explained compassion and cognition, now the seventh and eighth explain compassion and cognition separately, and both orders are viable. The seventh is the treatise's indestructibility of broadly benefiting sentient beings, explaining indestructibility in not relinquishing the samādhi of emptiness in the preceding causal circumstance of transforming sentient beings. The eighth is the treatise's indestructibility of seeking supreme liberation above, explaining indestructibility in the samādhi of emptiness that truly does not differentiate in the preceding causal circumstance of purifying cognitive hindrances, the meaning of which is as stated before. The ninth is the treatise's indestructibility of the practice of transforming sentient beings, explaining indestructibility in the samādhi of emptiness that is free and not free in the preceding causal circumstance of vowing to take up existence; carrying emptiness while engaging existence, it is therefore said to accord with expedient means (upāya). Thus, although the commentary avoided tedious text and did not assign each fully, the explanatory text already contains and provides them all.